Month: September 2016

Harvard. Statistical Tables about Economics Ph.D.’s, 1931-35

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-18

In 1937 the Harvard Department of Economics was caught up in a storm that came to be known as the Sweezy-Walsh Affair. Alan R. Sweezy (A.B. Harvard, 1929; Ph.D. Harvard, 1932) and J. Raymond Walsh (B.A. Beloit College, 1921; Ph.D. Harvard, 1934) were given notice in March 1937 that their first-term appointments as faculty instructors that were to expire on August 31, 1937 would be followed by two year “terminating appointments”. A public uproar ensued involving allegations that these dismissals had been politically motivated.

The Sweezy-Walsh Affair ultimately resulted in a pair of reports written by a committee of senior Harvard faculty. Both reports are important documents in the history of American higher education, but today’s post is limited to cherry-picking two appendices from the second report (Report on Some Problems of Personnel in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences) that provide a few interesting statistics on the Ph.D. recipients from the departments of English, History, Government, Economics and Physics during the period 1931-35.

From the Preface

…In May, 1937, a Memorandum signed by 131 junior teachers in Harvard College was sent by them to the following full professors: E. Merrick Dodd, Jr. [Law], Felix Frankfurter [Law], Elmer P. Kohler [Chemistry], Edmund M. Morgan [Law], Kenneth B. Murdock [English], Samuel E. Morison [History], Ralph Barton Perry [Philosophy], Arthur M. Schlesinger [History], and Harlow Shapley [Astronomy]. This Memorandum set forth certain “misgivings” of the signers relating both to the particular case of the terminating appointments given to Drs. Walsh and Sweezy of the Department of Economics, and to the general question of the status of junior teachers in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

By the letter dated May 18,1937, eight of the nine professors to whom the Memorandum was addressed urged upon the President the desirability of an investigation, “conducted by a committee regularly appointed by the President,” which should report on “the action taken in the cases of Walsh and Sweezy” and also on “the larger and more fundamental question of whether the method by which in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences the fitness of younger men for appointment, reappointment, and promotion is decided, insures fair judgment of the merits of scholars and teachers, and guarantees academic freedom.” In a letter dated May 26, 1937, the President requested the nine professors to whom the Memorandum was addressed “to make the investigation which the petitioners desire” and “appointed them a committee for that purpose.” At the Committee’s suggestion, Professor William S. Ferguson [History] was appointed in place of Professor Samuel E. Morison [History], who was to be absent on leave. Professor Elmer P. Kohler [Chemistry] died on May 24, 1938, and his place was not filled.

…the Committee sent to 221 younger teachers within the jurisdiction of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, including (with a few exceptions) all annual instructors of two or more years of service, faculty instructors, and assistant professors, a questionnaire in which they were asked to give their opinions on various matters covered by the inquiry. A similar questionnaire was later sent to 62 other teachers (6 associate professors, 56 annual instructors and assistants) who had signed the Memorandum. A letter of inquiry was sent to chairmen of departments. All of the chairmen and 201 of the teachers (164 of the first group, and 37 of the second group) replied, and the Committee has made full use of their statements and suggestions.

After completion of the first report in May, 1938, various topics were assigned to the individual members of the Committee for preliminary investigation and analysis. The Committee reassembled in September, 1938, and since then has devoted every Wednesday afternoon and numerous additional meetings to the discussion of its problems and to the consideration of initial drafts of portions of this report, prepared either by individual members or by sub-committees.

… Statistical and other materials compiled by the Committee but not published in the present report, will, so far as they are non-confidential in nature, and conceivably useful for future inquiries, be deposited in the archives of the University.

APPENDIX II

Analysis of careers of graduate students in English, History, Government, Economics, and Physics taking their doctorate in the years 1931-35 inclusive.

I. Their present representation on Harvard staff.

Of the 293 men who took degrees between 1931 and 1935 inclusive, 18 are now on the Faculty of Arts and Sciences; 3 are in other departments (2 in the Business School and 1 in the Medical School). Of the 18, 6 are in English or English and Comparative Literature, 4 in History, 3 in Government, 2 in Economics, and 3 in Physics.

Percentages are:

English	7.3
History	5.33
Government	8.33
Economics	2.95
Physics	8.37
Average [of the above]	7.17

Of the 293, 82 took their Ph.D. before their 28^th year. Of these 6, or 7.2%, were on the Faculty in 1937-38.

II. Gross average age of men at time of taking doctorate.

English	31.11	82 men
History	31.83	75 men
Government	30.61	36 men
Economics	30.76	68 men
Physics	28.50	32 men
[Average of above]	30.86

Omitting men who entered late or dropped out for a relatively large number of years during the course of study (viz. 15, 14, 8, 11, and 1 in English, History, Government, Economics, and Physics respectively) the normal ages at which the doctorate was taken were:

English	29.3	67 men
History	30.05	61 men
Government	28.60	28 men
Economics	29.20	57 men
Physics	28.2	31 men
[Average of above]	29.55

III. Distribution of youngest groups by departments.

The percentages of all men taking the doctorate while under 27 (I) years and under 28 (II) years of age were:

	I		II
	Per cent	Number	Per cent	Number
English	17.0	14	24.4	20
History	10.66	8	16.0	12
Government	19.4	7	38.9	14
Economics	20.6	17	30.9	21
Physics	40.66	13	46.9	15

IV. Academic year-span.

Omitting as abnormal men taking 10 or more academic years between entering Harvard and getting the doctorate, the academic year-span in the five Departments was as follows:

English	5.72
History	5.72
Government	5.41
Economics	4.85
Physics	4.83
Average [of the above]	5.36

The abnormal men mentioned above were distributed as follows:

	Per cent	Number
English	15.85	13
History	24.0	18
Government	5.5	2
Economics	11.76	6
Physics	9.37	3

V. Distribution by departments of men who dropped out temporarily, left before taking final examinations, or stayed on to the end.

Percentages of normal men (here or hereafter in the sense of II) whose courses were interrupted by absence from Harvard between entering and discontinuing graduate studies here were as follows:

	Per cent	Number
English	52.25	35
History	22.95	14
Government	35.71	10
Economics	24.56	14
Physics	12.90	4

The following percentages of normal men left Harvard and took their degrees one or more years afterwards:

	Per cent	Number
English	31.34	21
History	59.01	36
Government	60.71	17
Economics	49.12	28
Physics	16.13	5

Normal men whose program toward the doctorate was uninterrupted by either of these reasons:

	Per cent	Number
English	34.32	23
History	36.06	22
Government	17.86	5
Economics	35.08	20
Physics	70.96	22

Men who both dropped out and “left”:

English	18
History	11
Government	3
Economics	5
Physics	0

This accounts for the excesses in the percentages given above.

VI. Analysis of numbers of men whose study was uninterrupted.

	Number	Per cent	Average of acad. years	Average age	Non-teachers	Teaching at Harvard	Teachers before coming to Harvard*
English	23	34.32	4.217	27.83	14	3	7 (1)
History	22	36.06	5.73	29.52	7	14	5 (4)
Government	5	17.86	4.0	27.21	0	4	2 (1)
Economics	20	35.08	4.9	28.78	3	16	3 (2)
Physics	22	70.96	4.63	27.27	8	14	1 (1)

*[in parentheses, “both” taught at and previous to Harvard]

VII. Effect of teaching on age at graduation.

English:	Teachers normal age	29.47
English:	Non-teachers normal age	27.05
History:	Teachers normal age	30.64
History:	Non-teachers normal age	28.19
Government:	Teachers normal age	28.19
Government:	Non-teachers normal age	29.16
Economics:	Teachers normal age	29.13
Economics:	Non-teachers normal age	29.18
Physics:	Teachers normal age	29.18
Physics:	Non-teachers normal age	26.09

VIII. Teaching of normal men.

	Non-teachers	Taught at Harvard		Taught elsewhere	Percentage of Teachers
	Non-teachers	Number	Per cent	Taught elsewhere	Percentage of Teachers
English	27	17	25.4	23	59.7
History	18	31*	50.8	12	70.5
Government	10	13	46.4	5	46.4
Economics	18	30	52.6	9	68.4
Physics	10	20	67.7	1	67.7

*In History, readers who had a corporation appointment are included though they occasionally received as little as $150 salary: these should be eliminated. Similar eliminations should probably be made in other departments.

Some of the non-teachers may have taught outside Harvard: the records are incomplete.

[…]

APPENDIX IV

	No. of graduate-student tutors	No. of their tutees	Total Concentration	Percentage tutored by graduate-students
English	14	156	336½	46.3
History	2	47	273½	17.1
Government	11	168	389	43.2
Economics	18	284	462½	61.4
Physics	3	19½	49	39.8

Source: Special Committee appointed by the President of Harvard University. Report on Some Problems of Personnel in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Mass., 1939, pp. vii-ix, 160-163.

Tags SweezyA, WalshJR

Columbia Curriculum Germany

Columbia. Political Economy Courses Compared to Courses at the University of Berlin, 1897

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-16

___________________

An excerpt from a newspaper report comparing political economy as taught in New York at Columbia University with political economy as taught in Berlin was published in the Columbia University Bulletin in 1897. The unnamed author of the report concluded that “the primacy which Germany enjoyed a few years ago has passed away”. Compare this to a report (1884) overflowing with praise for the research “seminary” of German universities.

___________________

In the Evening Post of October 25, 1897, will be found an interesting discussion of the value of German university degrees in comparison with similar honors in American universities. The writer, who is apparently a student in the University of Berlin, holds that the requirements for the degree of Ph. D. are higher in several American institutions than in the average German university. His points are, first, that it takes a shorter time to obtain the degree in Germany than from any of the reputable American universities; and second, that the average size and value of the dissertations of Harvard and Columbia doctors of philosophy are certainly greater than those of the German universities, with the exception, probably, of Berlin. Indeed, he concludes, “the progress of American universities has been so rapid in recent years, and the entrance requirements have been so largely increased, that the bachelor’s degree is actually approaching the German doctorate in essential worth.” A few selections from the body of the article, comparing the instruction in political science at Columbia with that given at Berlin, are of special interest.

“Further light on the question will be thrown by a comparison of the courses of lectures in American and German universities. Confining attention to the various studies in the domain of political economy and social science, we may select Berlin as the strongest representative of German Institutions.* * * * Of the American schools of political science, it is not easy to select the strongest. Columbia is usually regarded as the best equipped, although several others are but little inferior. Let us compare, then, the courses offered at Columbia and Berlin in political economy.

“At Berlin, Professor Wagner gives three courses, aggregating ten hours, that cover the field of general and theoretical economics, and practical economics, including money and banking, etc. At Columbia, almost precisely the same field is covered by Professor Mayo-Smith’s “Historical and Practical Economy,” running through three semesters and aggregating nine hours. Almost the only difference is that Professor Wagner devotes more time to agricultural economics, a subject that has as yet received little attention in American schools of political economy. In finance Professor Wagner offers a four-hour course for one semester. Professor Seligman at Columbia covers the same ground, with more discrimination, in a two-hour course running two semesters. He also offers in alternate years a two-hour course on the financial history of the United States.

“In economic or industrial history Columbia stands the comparison very well. It has an introductory course on the economic history of Europe and America conducted by Professor Seligman and Mr. Day, and an advanced course on the industrial and tariff history of the United States by Professor Seligman. The two courses aggregate the same number of hours as Professor Schmoller’s “practical political economy,” which is nothing but industrial history, and history of Prussia at that—a course valuable to the specialist, but not of great value to the average American student. Professor Meitzen also gives a course on the history of agriculture, but it concerns the early land systems of Europe and other subjects that can have no application to American conditions. The essential forms of land tenure are described at Columbia in Professor Mayo-Smith’s historical political economy.

“In the field of statistics, the subject of demography or population statistics is treated at Berlin by Professor Boeckh in a two-hour course, and at Columbia by Professor Mayo-Smith in a similar course. Economic statistics are treated by Professors Meitzen and Mayo-Smith in much the same manner, while the history, theory, and technique of statistics receives attention in both institutions.

“At Berlin, Professor Wagner reads a critique of socialism and Dr. Oldenburg gives its history. The two courses aggregate the same number of hours as Professor Clark’s course on socialism at Columbia. Professor Clark’s criticism of “scientific socialism” is at least equal to that of any German professor, and it proceeds from the Anglo-Saxon point of view. In a second semester Professor Clark deals with projects of social reform, especially those of American origin. Somewhat similar is Dr. Oldenburg’s course on Socialpolitik at Berlin, and Dr. Jastrow reads in addition a course on labor legislation.

“In social science Columbia is clearly in advance of Berlin. Sociology is scarcely recognized at the German universities, but at Berlin Dr. Simmel, privat-docent, offers a two-hour course on sociology and political psychology. This is the nearest approach to a study of the growth and structure of society that one finds at Berlin. Columbia, on the other hand, offers a course on the evolution of society and social institutions, with a review of the principal theoretical writers, and another course on sociological laws. These are both given by Professor Giddings, who also reads courses on crime and pauperism. No such practical study of these problems is made in Berlin.

“Several minor courses are offered at each university—as, for example, railway problems—and all of the professors conduct seminars for the purpose of encouraging and supervising original investigations. The only subject in which Berlin offers superior advantages is agricultural economics, while Columbia is doing much more work in both theoretical and practical social science. Two courses remain to be mentioned. One of these is a course by Dr. Jastrow at Berlin on the literature and methodology of all the political sciences, an introductory course of considerable value to freshmen, which has no parallel in any other German or American university known to the writer. But Columbia offers a course that can scarcely be duplicated in Germany, namely, the abstract theory of political economy given by Professor Clark, one of the acutest and most original thinkers of our day. It is a course that is taken by not more than a dozen or fifteen men, but they are advanced students who can appreciate such a course. Professor Clark’s power of inspiring young men to do theoretical work of high quality is evidenced by the writings of such men as the late Dr. Merriam, of Cornell, and Professor Carver, of Oberlin College. But in Germany pure theory has been neglected since the time of Hermann. Only now, as the result of an impulse proceeding from Austria, is theory regaining its place in German economic circles. Professor Dietzel and some of the other younger scholars are doing good work in this line, which is hardly comparable, however, with that of Professors Clark, Patten, etc., in the United States, and Marshall in England. German economists are making valuable contributions to economics in other ways, but the primacy which Germany enjoyed a few years ago has passed away.”

Source: Columbia University Bulletin, Vol. XVIII (December, 1897), pp. 67-69.

Image Source: The University of Berlin between ca. 1890 and ca. 1900. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. Digital ID: ppmsca 00342.

Tags Carver, ClarkJB, Giddings, Mayo-Smith, Merriam, Patten, Seligman

Chicago Economists

Chicago. Alumnus, economics Ph.D. Harold Glenn Moulton, 1914

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-15

________________________

Besides being of interest to us as the first President of the Brookings Institution, Harold Glenn Moulton started his career on the faculty of the University of Chicago after having earned a doctorate there in 1914. This post provides a time line of his career followed by links to some of his early books, a few of which (Principles of Money and Banking, Exercises and Questions for Use with “Principles of Money and Banking”, and The Financial Organization of Society) clearly include course readings used in the Department of Political Economy and the School of Commerce and Administration (i.e. Business School) of the University of Chicago at the time.

Another posting provides interesting anecdotes of a biographical nature up to the time that Moulton moved from Chicago to Washington, D.C. in 1922.

________________________

Harold Glenn Moulton: Life and Career

1883. Born November 7, in Rose Lake Township (later LeRoy), Michigan.

1903-5. Student, Albion College.

1905-7. Student, University of Chicago. Ph.B. (1907)

1908-1909. Teacher at Evanston Academy.

1909-10. Fellow in Political Economy, University of Chicago.

1910. Travelling Fellow (to Europe for research on transportation systems).

1910-11. Assistant in Political Economy at the University of Chicago.

1911-14. Instructor in Political Economy at the University of Chicago.

1914. Ph.D. awarded, University of Chicago. Thesis title: Waterways vs. railways.

1914-18. Assistant Professor of Political Economy at the University of Chicago.

1918-22. Associate Professor of Political Economy at the University of Chicago.

1921. Head of the Institute of Economics, Washington, D.C.

1922. Professor of Political Economy at the University of Chicago.

1927-52. President, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.

1952. Retirement. Brookings President emeritus.

1965, December 14. Died in Charles Town West Virginia.

Selected early (i.e. downloadable) works by Moulton

Principles of Money and Banking: A Series of Selected Materials, with Explanatory Introductions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1916.

Exercises and Questions for Use with “Principles of Money and Banking”. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1916.

Readings in the Economics of War. J. Maurice Clark, Walton H. Hamilton and Harold G. Moulton (eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1918.

The War and Industrial Readjustments. In The University of Chicago War Papers, No. 5. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, April 1918.

The Financial Organization of Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1921.

America and the Balance Sheet of Europe (together with John Foster Bass). New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1921.

The Control of Germany and Japan (together with Louis Marlio). Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1944.

Image Source: The University of Chicago Magazine, Volume V, No. 4 (February 1913), p. 115

Tags Moulton

Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Requirements for Ph.D., 1920

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-14

The following requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the Columbia University Faculty of Political Science were published in the Columbia University Bulletin of Information. Announcement 1920-1921 of Courses offered in History, Economics and Public Law. The date of publication of the Bulletin is January 31, 1920 which is two weeks before the Faculty officially approved the requirements proposed by the Committee on Instruction. This would suggest that in this matter the Faculty served as a rubber-stamp for its Committee on Instruction.

Of particular interest are two resolutions that follow these requirements, one that would have opened all courses to women (unless the professor in charge objected!!) and a second proposed by the economist Henry Seager to allow greater flexibility in the choice of a second foreign language. The women’s resolution was tabled (!) and the language resolution was adopted.

Minutes of the Faculty of Political Science
Feb. 13, 1920

Upon motion of Professor [Carlton J. H.] Hayes [Professor of History] on behalf of the Committee on Instruction, the Faculty then approved the following requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, as a substitute for the requirements adopted by the Faculty at its meeting on March 28, 1919, and set forth on pages 468 to 471 of the Minutes of the Faculty:

I. Requirements

General. The degree is conferred upon such students as shall satisfy the requirements as to preliminary training, residence, languages, subjects, and dissertation.
Preliminary Training. The candidate must have received a bachelor’s degree from Columbia University or from some other approved university or college, or have had an education equivalent to that represented by such a degree, and must have been regularly accepted as a graduate student by the University Committee on Admissions.
Residence. The candidate must have pursued graduate studies for at least two academic years, one of which must have been spent at this University, and the other of which, if not spent here, at an institution accepted as offering courses of similar standard. A year’s residence at this University is defined as registration for and attendance upon courses aggregating not less that thirty tuition points distributed over a period of not less than one academic year or its equivalent.
Languages. The candidate must have demonstrated his ability to express himself in correct English and to read at last one European language other than English and such additional languages as may, within the discretion of the Executive Officer of the appropriate Department, be deemed essential for the prosecution of his studies. Normally, the language requirements for each subject are as indicated in the following paragraph.
Subjects. The candidate must have familiarized himself with one subject of primary interest and at least one subject of secondary interest, chosen from the following list of subjects. Information with reference to the scope of each of these subjects and special departmental requirements may be obtained from the Executive Officer of the Department within which it belongs.

Ancient History (French, German, Latin, and Greek)
Medieval History (French, German, Latin)
Modern European History (French & German)
American History (French or Spanish or Portuguese)
Political and Social Philosophy (French, German, and Latin)
American Government (French or German)
European Governments (French and German)
Constitutional Law (French or German)
International Law (French and either German or Latin)
Roman Law and Comparative Jurisprudence (Latin and either French or German)
Economic Theory, History, and Statistics (French and German)
Public and Private Finance (French and German)
Social Economic Problems, including Labor, Industrial Orgnization, Trade, Transportation, etc. (French & German)
Sociology, Historical, Statistical and Political (French and German)
Social Legislation and Statistics (French and German)

Dissertation. The main test of the candidate’s qualification is the production of a dissertation which shall demonstrate his capacity to contribute to the advancement of learning within the field of his selection. Such dissertation must give evidence of the candidate’s capacity to present in good literary form the results of original researches upon some approved topic. The dissertation must be printed in a form acceptable to the Faculty before the degree will be awarded.

II. Procedure

Notice of Prospective Candidacy. As soon as possible after the beginning of his graduate residence the student shall give notice of prospective candidacy to the Executive Officer of the Department in which the subject of his primary interest lies, and in consultation with him make a choice of subjects.
Languages and Written Work. As soon as possible after giving notice of prospective candidacy, the student shall submit to the Executive Officer of the Department concerned an essay or other paper giving satisfactory evidence of his ability to make researches and to express himself in correct English. At the same time the student shall be tested, by some officer of instruction designated by the Executive Officer of the Department, as to his ability to read the required languages; language tests are normally given in October and February.
Examination on Subjects. Having pursued graduate studies in this University, or in some other institution approved by it, for the equivalent of at least six months after the satisfactory completion of the tests on languages and written work, the student, upon the advice of the professor in charge of the subject of his primary interest or of his researches, shall make application, through the Executive Officer of the Department concerned, to the Dean for examination in subjects. Such application may be made at any time, but to secure the examination in any given academic year the application must be made before April 15. The applicant will be notified by the Dean of the date of his examination. This examination is an oral examination, which may be supplemented by a written examination when required by the Department concerned, and is conducted by a committee of the Faculty appointed by the Dean. By it the applicant will be expected to demonstrate an adequate knowledge of the subjects of his primary and secondary interest and of the literature pertaining thereto.
Matriculation. Upon the successful passing of the required examination in his subjects, the applicant will be recommended by the Executive Officer of the appropriate Department to the Dean for matriculation, which is admission to candidacy for the degree.
Dissertation. Soon after beginning his graduate residence, the student should choose the subject of his dissertation. His investigations and researches may be pursued either in connection with the work of some research course or under the direction and supervision of some member of the Faculty independently of any course. In either case a very considerable part of the time of the candidate or prospective candidate for the degree should be devoted to work upon his dissertation. The dissertation may be completed either during the period of residence, or in absentia. In advance of its being printed for presentation to the Faculty it must be approved by the professor in charge and accepted by the Executive Officer of the Department concerned. Such acceptance, however, is not to be construed as acceptance by the Faculty.
Final Examination: Defense of the Dissertation. At least one month in advance of the time at which he wishes to present himself for the defense of his dissertation, but not later than March 15 in any academic year, the candidate must make application therefor to the Dean, who will thereafter notify him of the date of the final examination. This examination is an oral examination conducted by a Committee of the Faculty appointed by the Dean. By it the candidate will be held to a defense of his dissertation in respect of its content, the sources upon which it is based, the interpretations that are made, the conclusions that are drawn, as well as in respect of the candidate’s acquainted with the literature and available sources of information upon subjects that are cognate to the subject of his dissertation.

On behalf of the Committee on Instruction, Professor Hayes then presented the following resolution:

RESOLVED: That all courses offered under the Faculty of Political Science, except those in which the Professor in charge objects, be open to women graduates.

Upon motion the Faculty voted to lay this resolution on the table.

On behalf of the Committee on Instruction, Professor [Henry Rogers] Seager [Professor of Political Economy] then moved the following resolution, which was adopted:

RESOLVED: That the foreign language requirement prescribed as “normal” in the Faculty regulations governing the award of the doctorate may be modified: either by the substitution of another language for a prescribed language, with the approval of the Department concerned; or by the omission of a prescribed language, with the approval of the Committee on Instruction on the recommendation of the Executive Officer of the Department concerned; provided that one European language other than English shall be required.

Source: Columbia University Archives. Minutes of the Faculty of Political Science 1920-1939. Minutes of February 13, 1920, pp.488-493.

Image Source: New York Public Library Digital Collections, Image ID 68250.

Tags Seager

Chicago Economists Funny Business

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. (1903), Canadian Humorist Stephen Leacock.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-13

It is not every day that one stumbles upon a history-of-economics arc connecting Thorstein Veblen to Groucho Marx and Jack Benny. The economist that connected the iconoclast economist to those veterans of vaudeville comedy is the Canadian humorist and Chicago student of Thorstein Veblen, Stephen Butler Leacock.

First I post here some data (the actual starting point of my background check of Leacock, the Chicago Ph.D.) found in the University of Chicago’s registers of its Ph.D.’s and annual catalogues.

The author’s autobiographical Preface to Leacock’s greatest hit, Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912) follows. The stories themselves strike most, if not all, of the same chords that Garrison Keillor’s News from Lake Wobegon has played over the past decades.

Finally I will allow myself the short-cut of quoting Wikipedia to complete the sketch of both sides of this most interesting fellow.

The McGill economics department entry for Stephen Leacock.

_____________________

Stephen Butler Leacock
University of Chicago Ph.D. in Political Economy, 1903.

Thesis Title: The doctrine of laissez faire.

A.B. University of Toronto, 1891.

1889-99. Instructor in French and German, Upper Canada College.
1899-1900. Graduate Student, University of Chicago.
1921. Head of Department of Economics and Political Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
1931, April 1. Professor and Head of Department of Economics and Political Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
1938, April 1. Professor Emeritus of Economics and Political Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

_____________________

Author’s Preface to Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912)

I KNOW no way in which a writer may more fittingly introduce his work to the public than by giving a brief account of who and what he is. By this means some of the blame for what he has done is very properly shifted to the extenuating circumstances of his life.

I was born at Swanmoor, Hants, England, on December 30, 1869. I am not aware that there was any particular conjunction of the planets at the time, but should think it extremely likely. My parents migrated to Canada in 1876, and I decided to go with them. My father took up a farm near Lake Simcoe, in Ontario. This was during the hard times of Canadian farming, and my father was just able by great diligence to pay the hired men and, in years of plenty, to raise enough grain to have seed for the next year’s crop without buying any. By this process my brothers and I were inevitably driven off the land, and have become professors, business men, and engineers, instead of being able to grow up as farm labourers. Yet I saw enough of farming to speak exuberantly in political addresses of the joy of early rising and the deep sleep, both of body and intellect, that is induced by honest manual toil.

I was educated at Upper Canada College, Toronto, of which I was head boy in 1887. From there I went to the University of Toronto, where I graduated in 1891. At the University I spent my entire time in the acquisition of languages, living, dead, and half- dead, and knew nothing of the outside world. In this diligent pursuit of words I spent about sixteen hours of each day. Very soon after graduation I had forgotten the languages, and found myself intellectually bankrupt. In other words I was what is called a distinguished graduate, and, as such, I took to school teaching as the only trade I could find that needed neither experience nor intellect. I spent my time from 1891 to 1899 on the staff of Upper Canada College, an experience which has left me with a profound sympathy for the many gifted and brilliant men who are compelled to spend their lives in the most dreary, the most thankless, and the worst paid profession in the world. I have noted that of my pupils, those who seemed the laziest and the least enamoured of books are now rising to eminence at the bar, in business, and in public life; the really promising boys who took all the prizes are now able with difficulty to earn the wages of a clerk in a summer hotel or a deck hand on a canal boat.

In 1899 I gave up school teaching in disgust, borrowed enough money to live upon for a few months, and went to the University of Chicago to study economics and political science. I was soon appointed to a Fellowship in political economy, and by means of this and some temporary employment by McGill University, I survived until I took the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in 1903. The meaning of this degree is that the recipient of instruction is examined for the last time in his life, and is pronounced completely full. After this, no new ideas can be imparted to him.

From this time, and since my marriage, which had occurred at this period, I have belonged to the staff of McGill University, first as lecturer in Political Science, and later as head of the department of Economics and Political Science. As this position is one of the prizes of my profession, I am able to regard myself as singularly fortunate. The emolument is so high as to place me distinctly above the policemen, postmen, street-car conductors, and other salaried officials of the neighbourhood, while I am able to mix with the poorer of the business men of the city on terms of something like equality. In point of leisure, I enjoy more in the four corners of a single year than a business man knows in his whole life. I thus have what the business man can never enjoy, an ability to think, and, what is still better, to stop thinking altogether for months at a time.

I have written a number of things in connection with my college life — a book on Political Science, and many essays, magazine articles, and so on. I belong to the Political Science Association of America, to the Royal Colonial Institute, and to the Church of England. These things, surely, are a proof of respectability. I have had some small connection with politics and public life. A few years ago I went all round the British Empire delivering addresses on Imperial organization. When I state that these lectures were followed almost immediately by the Union of South Africa, the Banana Riots in Trinidad, and the Turco-Italian war, I think the reader can form some idea of their importance. In Canada I belong to the Conservative party, but as yet I have failed entirely in Canadian politics, never having received a contract to build a bridge, or make a wharf, nor to construct even the smallest section of the Transcontinental Railway. This, however, is a form of national ingratitude to which one becomes accustomed in this Dominion.

Apart from my college work, I have written two books, one called “Literary Lapses” and the other “Nonsense Novels.” Each of these is published by John Lane (London and New York), and either of them can be obtained, absurd though it sounds, for the mere sum of three shillings and sixpence. Any reader of this preface, for example, ridiculous though it appears, could walk into a bookstore and buy both of these books for seven shillings. Yet these works are of so humorous a character that for many years it was found impossible to print them. The compositors fell back from their task suffocated with laughter and gasping for air. Nothing but the invention of the linotype machine or rather, of the kind of men who operate it made it possible to print these books. Even now people have to be very careful in circulating them, and the books should never be put into the hands of persons not in robust health.

Many of my friends are under the impression that I write these humorous nothings in idle moments when the wearied brain is unable to perform the serious labours of the economist. My own experience is exactly the other way. The writing of solid, instructive stuff fortified by facts and figures is easy enough. There is no trouble in writing a scientific treatise on the folk-lore of Central China, or a statistical enquiry into the declining population of Prince Edward Island. But to write something out of one’s own mind, worth reading for its own sake, is an arduous contrivance only to be achieved in fortunate moments, few and far between. Personally, I would sooner have written “Alice in Wonderland ” than the whole Encyclopaedia Britannica.

In regard to the present work I must disclaim at once all intention of trying to do anything so ridiculously easy as writing about a real place and real people. Mariposa is not a real town. On the contrary, it is about seventy or eighty of them. You may find them all the way from Lake Superior to the sea, with the same square streets and the same maple trees and the same churches and hotels, and everywhere the sunshine of the land of hope.

Similarly, the Reverend Mr. Drone is not one person, but about eight or ten. To make him I clapped the gaiters of one ecclesiastic round the legs of another, added the sermons of a third and the character of a fourth, and so let him start on his way in the book to pick up such individual attributes as he might find for himself. Mullins and Bagshaw and Judge Pepperleigh and the rest are, it is true, personal friends of mine. But I have known them in such a variety of forms, with such alternations of tall and short, dark and fair, that, individually, I should have much ado to know them. Mr. Pupkin is found whenever a Canadian bank opens a branch in a county town and needs a teller. As for Mr. Smith, with his two hundred and eighty pounds, his hoarse voice, his loud check suit, his diamonds, the roughness of his address and the goodness of his heart, all of this is known by everybody to be a necessary and universal adjunct of the hotel business.

The inspiration of the book, —a land of hope and sunshine where little towns spread their square streets and their trim maple trees beside placid lakes almost within echo of the primeval forest, is large enough. If it fails in its portrayal of the scenes and the country that it depicts the fault lies rather with an art that is deficient than in an affection that is wanting.

STEPHEN LEACOCK.

McGill University,
June, 1912.

Source: Stephen Leacock, Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town, London: John Lane, 1912, pp. vii-xii.

_______________________

Academic and political life

Disillusioned with teaching, in 1899 he began graduate studies at the University of Chicago under Thorstein Veblen, where he received a doctorate in political science and political economy. He moved from Chicago, Illinois to Montreal, Quebec, where he eventually became the William Dow Professor of Political Economy and long-time chair of the Department of Economics and Political Science at McGill University.

He was closely associated with Sir Arthur Currie, former commander of the Canadian Corps in the Great War and principal of McGill from 1919 until his death in 1933. In fact, Currie had been a student observing Leacock’s practice teaching in Strathroy in 1888. In 1936, Leacock was forcibly retired by the McGill Board of Governors—an unlikely prospect had Currie lived.

Leacock was both a social conservative and a partisan Conservative. He opposed giving women the right to vote, disliked non-Anglo-Saxon immigration and supported the introduction of social welfare legislation. He was a staunch champion of the British Empire and the Imperial Federation Movement and went on lecture tours to further the cause.

Although he was considered as a candidate for Dominion elections by his party, it declined to invite the author, lecturer, and maverick to stand for election. Nevertheless, he would stump for local candidates at his summer home.

Literary Life

Early in his career, Leacock turned to fiction, humour, and short reports to supplement (and ultimately exceed) his regular income. His stories, first published in magazines in Canada and the United States and later in novel form, became extremely popular around the world. It was said in 1911 that more people had heard of Stephen Leacock than had heard of Canada. Also, between the years 1915 and 1925, Leacock was the most popular humorist in the English-speaking world.

A humorist particularly admired by Leacock was Robert Benchley from New York. Leacock opened correspondence with Benchley, encouraging him in his work and importuning him to compile his work into a book. Benchley did so in 1922, and acknowledged the nagging from north of the border.

Near the end of his life, the American comedian Jack Benny recounted how he had been introduced to Leacock’s writing by Groucho Marx when they were both young vaudeville comedians. Benny acknowledged Leacock’s influence and, fifty years after first reading him, still considered Leacock one of his favorite comic writers. He was puzzled as to why Leacock’s work was no longer well known in the United States.

During the summer months, Leacock lived at Old Brewery Bay, his summer estate in Orillia, across Lake Simcoe from where he was raised and also bordering Lake Couchiching. A working farm, Old Brewery Bay is now a museum and National Historic Site of Canada. Gossip provided by the local barber, Jefferson Short, provided Leacock with the material which would become Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912), set in the thinly-disguised Mariposa.

Although he wrote learned articles and books related to his field of study, his political theory is now all but forgotten. Leacock was awarded the Royal Society of Canada’s Lorne Pierce Medal in 1937, nominally for his academic work.

Source: From the Wikipedia article “Stephen Leacock”.

Image Source: PMA Productions, Extraordinary Canadians. Margaret Macmillan’s Episode on Stephen Leacock.

Tags Leacock, Veblen

Courses Exam Questions Suggested Reading

Harvard. European Central Banking. Schumpeter, 1945

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-12

Course offerings in money and monetary policy at Harvard in the late 1930s and most of the 1940s were dominated by John H. Williams and Alvin Hansen. An exception was the course, “The Theory and Policy of Central Banking: European Experience,” that was offered just once (Fall term 1945-46) by Joseph Schumpeter. I was only able to find what appears to be a hastily assembled, provisional list of suggested readings provided at the start of the semester with a promise that “References to material and literature will be given currently”. The list of final examination questions for the course that I found in Schumpeter’s papers at the Harvard Archives at least gives us some indication of the broad themes of the course.

_________________________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 142a. (fall term) Professor Schumpeter.—The Theory and Policy of Central Banking: European Experience.

4 Graduates, 1 Junior, 5 Public Administration, 1 Radcliffe: Total 11

Source: Harvard University, Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1945-46, p. 60.

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1945-6
Economics 142a

This course aims at working out the role of central banks both in the capitalist and in the planned economy, and at reviewing a number of theoretical and historical problems in the field of money and credit, relevant tot he main theme. References to material and literature will be given currently. The following list is confined to general suggestions.

General works on central banking.

A. C. Conant, History of Modern Banks of Issue, 6^th ed., 1927.
C. H. Kisch and W. A. Elkins, Central Banks*, 1928.
E. Victor Morgan, Theory and Practice of Central Banking, 1797-1913, 1942.
V. C. Smith, The Rationale of Central Banking, 1936.
R. G. Hawtrey, The Art of Central Banking*, 1932.
M. H. de Kock, Central Banking, 1939.

Works on the History of Banking Theory.

W. T. C. King, History of the English Discount Market*, 1936.
H. E. Miller, Banking Theories in the U. S. before 1860, 1927.
E. Wood, English Theories of Central Banking Control, 1819-1858, 1939.

For Prewar Figures on Central Banks, see

League of Nations, Money and Banking 1938-9, Vol. I, 1939.

Miscellaneous Suggestions.

J. W. Angell, The Behavior of Money, 1936.
P. Einzig, The Theory of Forward Exchange, 1937.
C. R. Whittlesey, Bank Liquidity and the War, (National Bureau of Economic Research, Our Economy in War, Occasional Paper 22).
A. Youngman, The Federal Reserve System in wartime, (the same, Occasional paper 21).

* These are especially recommended.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1945-46 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________________

Final Examination Questions

1945-46

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 142A

One question may be omitted. Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

Discuss the issue: “Control of Money” or “Control of Credit.”
If you were to frame the plan for a Central Bank, for instance in one of the South-American states, would you give it the right to do business with customers other than banks?
In 1910, the Governor of the Bank of England declared that the following types of finance bills were “legitimate”: (a) bills that represent exchange transactions; (b) bills created in order to finance the carrying of stocks of commodities or securities; (c) bills drawn in anticipation of public loans. Comment.
Suppose that a country which has been using paper money, adopts an unrestricted gold standard. Disregarding the period of transition, would you expect Bank Rate to keep on a higher level after the gold standard has been established than it did under the paper standard? Assume that the rest of the world is on the gold standard.
State the main points of difference between the constitutions and policies of the Bank of England, the Bank of France and the Bank of Germany in the last quarters of the 19^th century and explain briefly their significance and causes.
Explain the reasons for the decline in importance of the Domestic Bill during the half-century before 1914. Had this decline anything to do with the legislation about central banks? And had it, in turn, any influence upon their policy?

Final. January, 1946.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Joseph Schumpeter Papers. Lecture Notes, Box 3, Folder “misc. notes”.

Image Source: Selection from “Joseph A. Schumpeter and other at dinner table, ca. 1945”, Harvard University Archives HUGBS 276.90p (4).

Tags Schumpeter

Chicago Curriculum Fields

Chicago. Gordon, Fischer and Friedman Memos on Money Core Courses. 1972

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-11

When Milton Friedman went on leave from the University of Chicago in 1971-72, two assistant professors who had received their Ph.D.’s from M.I.T. were left minding the two core courses in “money” (a.k.a. “macroeconomics”) at Chicago. In this post I first provide the course listings and staffing for the core fields and then the transcription of an exchange of memos between Robert J. Gordon and Stanley Fischer (the two assistant professors just mentioned) on the one hand and their senior colleague Milton Friedman on the other.

The (then) young colleagues have tread most gingerly in the matter of overhauling the Chicago money courses. Friedman for his part has given them a “revise-and-resubmit” sort of response for their efforts. Perhaps Economics in the Rear-View Mirror will get lucky and receive a comment from Messrs. Gordon and Fischer about their memos’ ultimate impact on the Chicago core.

______________________________

Graduate Courses in 1971-72
Core Fields and Faculty

PRICE THEORY

300. Price Theory. McCloskey.
301. Price Theory. Becker, Evenson, Harberger.
302. Price Theory. Becker, H. Johnson
303. General Equilibrium Theory. Mundell.
307. Mathematical Methods in the Social and Administrative Sciences. Theil.
309. The Theory of the Allocation of Time. Ghez, Becker.

THEORY OF INCOME, EMPLOYMENT, AND THE PRICE LEVEL

330. Money: The Supply Side. Gordon
331. Money. Fischer, Telser.
332. Theory of Income, Employment, and the Price Level. Sjaastad, Zecher.
337. Special Topics in Monetary Theory. Fischer.

Becker, Gary (Ph.D., Chicago, 1955; John Bates Clark Medal Winner, 1967). University Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1970).
Recent research: Investment in human capital; the allocation of time; household production functions and non-market behavior; marriage and fertility; law and economics.

Evenson, Robert E. [visiting faculty] (Ph.D., Chicago, 1968; Associate Professor of Economics, Yale).
Recent research: economic development and agriculture.

Fischer, Stanley (Ph.D., M.I.T., 1969). Assistant Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1969).
Recent Research: Monetary growth models; lags and stabilization policy; trade and capital flows.

Friedman, Milton [on leave, 1971-72] (Ph.D., Columbia, 1946; John Bates Clark Medal Winner, 1951; President of A.E.A., 1967). Paul Snowden Russell Distinguished Service, Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1946).
Recent Research: The optimum quantity of money; secular and cyclical changes in money and income; a theoretical framework for monetary analysis.

Ghez, Gilbert (Ph.D., Columbia, 1970). Assistant Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1969).
Recent Research: A theory of life-cycle consumption; consumption and labor force participation; effects of education on consumption patterns.

Gordon, Robert J. (Ph.D., M.I.T., 1967). Assistant Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1968).
Recent Research: Labor market theory and inflation; econometric models of wage and price determination; problems in measurement of capital.

Harberger, Arnold C. (Ph.D., Chicago, 1950). Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1953).
Recent Research. Applied welfare economics; measurement of social opportunity costs of labor, capital, and foreign exchange; taxation and resource allocation.

Johnson, Harry G. (Ph.D., Harvard, 1958). Professor of Economics (Joint appointment with London School of Economics) (at Chicago since 1959).

Recent Research: Theory of international inflation; theory of effective protection; the two-sector model of general equilibrium; Keynesianism and monetarism.

McCloskey, Donald (Ph.D., Harvard, 1970). Assistant Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1968).
Recent Research: Topics in the application of economics to British economic history; the Old Poor Law as a negative income tax; the economic effects of Britain’s move to free international trade.

Mundell, Robert (Ph.D., M.I.T., 1956). Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1965).
Recent Research: Monetary systems and economic development; world inflation and unemployment; African currency systems; global trade policy.

Sjaastad, Larry A. (Ph.D., Chicago, 1961). Associate Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1962).
Recent research: Project evaluation in underdeveloped countries; economics of research.

Telser, Lester (Ph.D., Chicago, 1956). Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1958).
Recent research: Theory of competitive markets; game theory; the theory of the core; economics of information; determinants of the returns to manufacturing industries; equilibrium price distributions.

Theil, Henri (Ph.D., Amsterdam, 1951). University Professor of Economics (at Chicago since 1965).
Recent research: Econometric methodology and applications; mathematical and statistical methods in other social and administrative sciences.

Zecher, Joseph Richard (Ph.D., Ohio State, 1969). Assistant Professor of Economics and Director of the Undergraduate Program (at Chicago since 1968).
Recent research: Models of commercial banking; interest rates and expectations.

Source: Economics at Chicago (Departmental Brochure, 1971-72), p. 23, 26-30. This copy of the brochure found in the Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 194, Folder 4.

______________________________

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

May 22, 1972

To: Department of Economics Faculty
From: R. J. Gordon

Re: First Year Money Sequence

Stan Fischer, Dick Zecher, and I would like to propose the following reorganization of the topics taught in the first year graduate money-macro sequence. We have long felt that the present organization is suboptimal because (1) the student is taught two approaches to static income determination, one in 331 and one in 332, without sufficient coordination and integration of the two approaches, and (2) the separation between money supply in 330 and money demand in 331 does not work well, because money demand is involved in most of the topics covered in 330. The following reorganization puts static income determination of both the Quantity Theory and Keynesian varieties into course no. 1, in the sequence, then combines the money demand theory from the present 331 with the most important topics in the present 330 in course no. 2, and creates a third course devoted to dynamic topics.

We would like reactions, suggestions, and ideas. Presumably each course would be given twice on a staggered schedule.

COURSE NO. 1, to be called 331
taught in Fall and Winter

Static Income Determination in the style of Bailey and Patinkin
Elements of National Income Accounting
Doctrinal history and issues: General Theory, Patinkin vs. Friedman, Leijonhufvud
Theory of Consumption Function
Theory of Investment Behavior from Wicksell to Jorgenson

COURSE NO. 2, to be called 330
taught in Fall and Spring

Money demand theory
Tobin-Markowitz approach to portfolio allocation
Money supply theory
Financial intermediaries
Term structure and debt management
Modigliani-Miller and other issues in capital market theory

COURSE NO. 3, to be called 332
taught in Winter and Spring

Neoclassical nonmonetary growth models
Monetary growth models in the style of Foley-Sidrauski
Optimum Quantity of Money and welfare economics of inflation
Stability of inflation in Cagan-Mundell-type models
Multiplier-accelerator cycle models, simple inventory models
Models of Labor Market and Inflation
Simple models of open economies (could go in course no. 1)

______________________________

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date: July 20, 1972

To: Professor Robert J. Gordon, Department of Economics
From: Milton Friedman, Department of Economics

In re: Your Memo of May 22 on First-Year Money Sequence

I have been hesitant to react to your schedule of topics both because I believe a teacher must decide for himself what he is going to teach but also because my reactions naturally derive from my own experience in teaching these courses and I have not re-thought the question afresh, particularly not in the light of 330.

Nonetheless for what they are worth, let me give my offhand reactions. The basic thing that disturbs me about all three courses is that they are set up as a series of separate topics with no organizational structure in them. For both the monetary approach and the income expenditure approach there is a clear logical structure which it seems to me it is desirable to use in organizing the material. For money as for price theory the obvious structure is the demand for money, the supply of money and the equilibrium produced by their interaction. In Course 2 called 330 you have the elements of money demand theory and money supply theory, but they are put in as if they were on the same level as approaches to portfolio allocation, financial intermediaries, term structures, and the like. Obviously they are not. If financial intermediaries have any relevance to the theory of money it is because they partly enter into the money supply process; it is partly because they may affect the demand for money. Similarly, the Tobin-Markowitz approach to portfolio allocation is simply a fuller exploration of the individual decisions that underlie the demand for money. Similarly, in the income expenditure approach the logical organization has to do with aggregate demand on the one hand and aggregate supply on the other side and their interactions. Consumption theory and investment theories of income then become components of aggregate demand.

I can understand elements of national income accounting and institutional and descriptive material about the monetary and banking system coming early in the courses and preceding the kind of formal theoretical apparatus that I have been talking about, but I find it hard to see the optional history and issues coming where they do in your outline. It seems to me that the desirable thing in these courses is to teach, as best we can, the substance of what we know and believe to be the correct theory. The history of the thought enters in both in introducing and motivating the discussion; also it has always seemed to me desirable that so far as possible we should use the writings of the great men in the field to develop the points that remain valid out of their writings, and finally at the very end I can see where in discussing where we go from here and what the open issues are it is desirable to bring out the question of current and past controversies.

In connection with Course 3, that also seems to be a collection of topics. It is very hard for me to see the organizational structure that underlies it. Presumably what really is in the back of this is the notion that Courses 1 and 2 will deal with static equilibria opposition and Course 3 will deal with dynamic change. But yet that doesn’t quite fit the role of the optimum quantity of money and the welfare economics of inflation. What precisely is a logical structure underlying this? Indeed let me repeat that question for all three courses.

Needless to say, there is more than one organization that would be logically coherent and would be effective in teaching the material within these three courses, so I don’t mean to put any special weight on the one I outlined above, but I do believe that you need to bring the skeleton of your organization more clearly in the open than it is brought in the list of topics in these three courses. Incidentally, one minor item is that I do not see anywhere in any of the topics where quantity equations à la Irving Fisher, Marshall, and the early Keynes would be discussed at all.

(Dictated but not read)

MF:gv

______________________________

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date: July 26, 1972

To: Milton Friedman, Department of Economics
From: Bob Gordon and Stan Fischer, Department of Economics

In re: First Year Money Sequence

Thanks for your memo to Bob of July 20^th. Before reacting to your comments in more detail, let us attempt to restate the aims of the proposed revision. There were two major problems with the previous arrangement: (i) overlap of material in 330 and 331, (ii) 332 as a separate course was taught either as a hodge-podge of topics or as Keynesian multipliers run riot – by the time students had got through 331 the excuse for a separate income-determination course was slim.

The basic organizational structure, which the memo admittedly did not spell out, is based on the use of a common static model, as in Patinkin, Bailey, and equations (9) – (14) of your 1970 piece – as a starting point for discussion of both monetary and income-expenditure approaches (in 331). Once the basic issues are discussed in the framework of the common model – and this will occupy much of the 331 course – the examination of the building blocks of the model will begin. Since more time is needed for the building blocks than remains in 331, some pieces had to be placed in another course and it seemed sensible to separate out money supply and money demand. This makes 330 a self-contained course with the unifying principle that each topic contributes to a model of the monetary and financial markets, whereas the building blocks allocated to 331 are those of the commodity market. The placement of the labor market in the third course is the most arbitrary decision; it should probably be shifted to 331 so that the interaction between aggregate supply and demand can be adequately developed. (Incidentally, we apologize for giving the impression that each topic mentioned is to be given equal weight – we had in mind precisely the considerations mentioned in the second half of your second paragraph in writing, for instance, “Money demand theory” followed by “Tobin-Markowitz….”)

The idea in course 3 is indeed to emphasize dynamic elements. Here the intention is to use a simple common dynamic model, which has naturally to involve expectations and intertemporal maximization, and examine its behavior under a variety of assumptions on expectations etc. This leads naturally into the other topics mentioned in 3 – with the exception of the multiplier-accelerator and inventory models which tend to be sui generis and hard to fit into the overall scheme. (The open economy models also do not fit in very well.)

On your specific comments:

We also realize that each teacher decides what he wants to teach, but in view of the facts that these are the basic money courses and that students take them from different people, we feel it important to try to have some uniformity of coverage.
On the history of thought: we too use this to introduce and motivate the theories and we intend that it permeate the courses rather than be discussed in the middle of 331, as our memo now indicates.
The optimum quantity of money comes right out of discussions of intertemporal optimization by individuals (as in your article) and it does seem that the “Dynamic” course is a good place to discuss it.
The early quantity theorist’ views will obviously be discussed in great detail in the demand for money side of 330, and also in 331; this was one of the sub-topics we intended to be included under the 331 heading “doctrinal history.”

We would very much appreciate your commenting on this since we ourselves discussed several alternative organizations for the courses, and are far from certain that our proposal is optimal. Indeed, in the light of the fact that, as you say, everyone teaches what he wants, we felt some diffidence in making our proposal. But we do think it important to have some generally-greed-upon division of material for the three courses, if only to be fair to the students faced with the Core exam.

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers. Box 194, Folder 5.

Image Source: Milton Friedman (undated). University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-06230, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Tags Friedman, GordonRJ, Stanley Fischer, Zecher

Courses Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus Uncategorized

Harvard. Labor Organization and Collective Bargaining. Dunlop, 1947.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-11

John T. Dunlop’s course reading lists go on for pages. He mediated, arbitrated and advised besides teaching courses in labor relations including this post of material for his undergraduate course on unions and collective bargaining. His New York Times’ obituary closes with a nice 1973 quote published in Fortune Magazine: “Unless you can work out a consensus on a problem, it’s not a very good solution.” I guess we just now live in an age of diminished solutions. Material for next semester’s course 81b “Labor and Public Policy” has been posted as well.

_____________________

Course Enrollment for Economics 81a, Fall Term 1947

[Economics] 81a. Associate Professor Dunlop.–Trade Unionism and Collective Bargaining (F).

3 Graduates, 80 Seniors, 64 Juniors, 25 Sophomores, 15 Radcliffe: Total 187.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1947-48, p. 90.

_____________________

OUTLINE
Economics 81a
Fall, 1947

LABOR ORGANIZATION AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

I. Labor and Management Organization

1. The Institutional Setting
  1. The Beginnings of Organization
  2. The Relation of Labor Organization to “Capitalist” Society
  3. The Characteristics of the Labor Market
2. Development of the American Labor Movement
  1. Comparisons with other Countries
  2. Theories of Labor Organization Development
  3. Relation to the Growth of the American Economy
  4. Role of Community Values, Ideas, Legal Concepts, and Politics
3. Structure and Government of Labor Organizations
  1. Constitutional Government of the AFL and CIO
  2. Relations of Locals to International Bodies
  3. Labor Leadership
  4. Administrative Aspects of Labor Organizations
4. Management Organization in Industrial Relations
  1. The Locus of Policy Making Affecting Industrial Relations
  2. Management Organization for Bargaining
  3. Management Leadership

II. Operation and Results of Collective Bargaining

The Bargaining Process: Mechanics
1. The Collective Bargaining Agreement
2. The Scope and Area of Bargaining
3. Techniques of Bargaining
The Results on the Social Structure of a Work Community
The Results on the Conditions of Employment
1. Status of Union Members
2. Division of Work Opportunities
3. Procedures for Settling Disputes
The effects on Wages, Prices and Employment
1. Wage Determination under Collective Bargaining vs. the “Free Market”
2. Effects on the Shares of Real Income
3. Effects on Income and Employment Over Time
The Problem of Wage and Price Policies at Full Employment
The Impact on the Social Structure and the Political “Balance of Power” in the Nation

III. Public Policy Issues Raised by Labor and Management Organization and Collective Bargaining

_______________________

Economics 81 a
Questions

How do you account for the emergence of labor organizations? What are the distinctive features of the American labor movement?
To what extent is the American labor movement devoted to changing or preserving “capitalist” institutions?
What standards would you establish to appraise the extent to which a particular labor organization was “democratic”?
What are the possibilities of “peace” within the labor movement? What are the principal obstacles to effective unity?
What are the principal changes introduced into a work community by a labor organization? What changes typically take place in the management of the company?
What is collective bargaining? What is its scope? What problems and rights question, if any, are exclusively “prerogatives” of a union or a management?
What are the effects of collective bargaining on wages, prices, national income and the share of income going to various groups?
To what extent can the opposition of interest between employees and unions be relied upon to protect the public interest?
What scope would you give to the principle of seniority in layoff? In promotion?
Can union support be elicited to improve methods of production and to reduce costs? If so, how?
The area of bargaining has been growing. What are the consequences of industry-wide bargaining?
How would you appraise the following as principles of wage determination: the cost of living, ability to pay, productivity, wage rates in “comparable” firms and operations?
What should a “theory of wages” attempt to do? What do you understand by marginal productivity?
Is collective bargaining compatible with economic stability? May wages and prices be pushed up, of necessity, so rapidly as to result in instability in output and employment?
In view of long-term tendencies at work in our society, what kind of economic institutions and labor relations to you foresee 50 years from now?
The influence of labor organizations in the American social or political life has increased very materially in recent years. Why?

_______________________

Required and Recommended Reading

I. LABOR AND MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION

The Institutional Setting

Required Reading:

Bakke, E. Wight, Mutual Survival, The Goal of Unions and Management, pp. 1-82

Golden, C., and Ruttenberg, H., the Dynamics of Industrial Democracy, pp. 1-47

Leiserson, W. L., “The Role of Government in Industrial Relations,” Industrial Disputes and the Public Interest, pp. 35-51, (Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California)

Simons, Henry C., “Some Reflections on Syndicalism,” Journal of Political Economy, March, 1944, pp. 1-25

Slichter, Sumner H., The Challenge of Industrial Relations, pp. 1-28

Recommended Reading:

Brooks, R. R., As Steel Goes, pp. 1-20

Halevy, Elie, The Growth of Philosophical Radicalism

Hammond, J. L., and B., The Town Labourer, 1780-1832, Chap. 2, 10-15

Hobson, John A., The Evolution of Modern Capitalism

Hovell, Mark, The Chartist Movement, pp. 1-98

Lenin, V. I., What Is To Be Done?, pp. 31-93

Lester, R. A., Economics of Labor, pp. 3-49

Perlman, Selig, A Theory of the Labor Movement

Pound, Roscoe, Social Control Through Law

Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy

Shaw, George B., An Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism

Veblen, Theory of the Business Enterprise, Chapter 8

Wadsworth, A. P., and Mann, Julia, The Cotton Trade and Industrial Lancashire, 1600-1780, pp. 311-408

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, Industrial Democracy

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, The History of Trade Unionism, pp. 1-112

Whitehead, A. N., Adventures in Ideas

The Development of the American Labor Movement

Required Reading:

Harris, Herbert, American Labor, pp. 1-95

Commons, John R., and Associates, History of Labor in the United States, Vol. II, pp. 332-429

Millis, H. A., and Montgomery, R. E., Organized Labor, pp. 76-242

The United Steelworkers of America, The First Ten Years

Recommended Reading:

Bimba, A., The Molly Maguires

Brissenen, Paul, The I.W.W.

David, Henry, The History of the Haymarket Affair

Dunlop, John T., “The Changing Status of Labor,” The Growth of the American Economy, Edited by H. F. Williamson, pp. 607-31

Fine, Nathan, Labor and Farmer Parties in the United States, 1828-1928

Foner, P. S. History of the Labor Movement in the United States

Foster, William Z., From Bryan to Stalin

Frey, S. P., Craft Unions of Ancient and Modern Times

Galenson, Walter, Rival Unionism in the United States

Gluck, Elsie, John Mitchell, Miner

Gompers, Samuel, Seventy Years of Life and Labor

Grossman, Jonathan, William Sylvis, Pioneer of American Labor

Hollander, J. H., and Barnett, G. E., Studies in American Trade Unionism

Hoxie, Robert F., Trade Unionism in the United States

Jamison, Stuart, Labor Unionism in American Agriculture, Bulletin 836, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Lorwin, L. L., The American Federation of Labor

McCabe, D. A., National Collective Bargaining in the Pottery Industry

Morris, Richard B., Government and Labor in Early America

Perlman, S. and Taft, P., History of Labor in the United States, 1896-1932

Powderly, T. V., The Path I Trod

Roberts, Bryn, The American Labour Split and Allied Unity

Stolberg, Benjamin, Tailor’s Progress

Ware, Norman, Labor in Modern Economic Society

White, Kenneth, Labour and Democracy in the United States

Wolman, Leo, Ebb and Flow of Trade Unionism

Suggested Reading on Foreign Labor Movements

Cole, G. D. H., A Short History of the British Working Class Movement

Foenander, O. R, Towards Industrial Peace in Australia

Marquand, H. A., Laborer on Four Continents

Norgren, Paul, The Swedish Collective Bargaining System

Robbins, J. J., The Government of Labor Relations in Sweden

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, Industrial Democracy

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, Soviet Communism: A New Civilization?

Webb, Sidney and Beatrice, The History of Trade Unionism

Ehrmann, H. W., French Labor From Popular Front To Liberation

Wunderlich, F., German Labor Courts

Cole, G. H. and Postgate, R. W., British People, 1746-1947

Wunderlich, Frieda, Labor Under German Democracy, Arbitration 1918-33

Gualtieri, H. L., Labor Movement in Italy

Fitzpatrick, B. C., Short History of the Australian Labor Movement

Snow, H. F., Chinese Labor Movement

Hubbard, L. M., Soviet Labor and Industry

Structure and Government of Labor Organizations

Required Reading:

Herberg, Will, “Bureaucracy and Democracy in Labor Unions,” Antioch Review, Fall 1943, pp. 405-17

Millis, H. A., and Montgomery, R. E., Organized labor, pp. 243-320

Mills, C. Wright, “The Trade Union Leader: A Collective Portrait,” Public Opinion Quarterly, Summer, 1945, pp. 158-75

The Constitutions of the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations

Slichter, Sumner H., The Challenge of Industrial Relations, pp. 99-123

Taft, Philip, “Opposition to Union Officers in Elections,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February, 1944, pp. 256-64; “Judicial Procedure in Labor Unions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1945, pp. 370-85; “Dues and Initiation Fees in Labor Unions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1946, pp. 219-32

Boyer, Richard O., “Profiles, Union President” in The New Yorker, July 6, 1946, pp.22-30; July 13, 1946, pp. 30-42; July 20, 1946, pp. 26-35

Recommended Reading:

Brazeal, B. R., The Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters

Brown, L. C., Union Policies in the Leather Industry

Carsel, Wilfred, A History of the Chicago Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union

Chicago Joint Board, The Clothing Workers of Chicago, 1910-1912

Christenson, Collective Bargaining in Chicago; 1929-30

Green, Charles H., The Headwear Workers

Henig, Harry, The Brotherhood of Railway Clerks

Hill, Samuel E., Teamsters and Transportation

Hoxie, Robert F., Trade Unionism in the United States, pp. 177-87

Jensen, Vernon H., Lumber and Labor

LaMar, Elden, Philadelphia Clothing Workers

Levine, Louis, The Women’s Garment Workers

McCaleb, Walter F., Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen

Minton, Bruce and Stuart, John, Men Who Lead Labor

Mulcaire, Michael A., International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Northrup, Herbert, Organized Labor and the Negro

Northrup, H. R., Unionization of Professional Engineers and Chemists

Northrup, H. R., “The Tobacco Workers International Union,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1942

Painter, Leonard, Through Fifty Years with the Brotherhood Railway Carmen of America

Powell, Isona M., The History of the United Typothetae of America

Rubin, Jay and Obermeier, M. J., The Life and Times of Edward Floro

Ryan, Frederick L., Industrial Relations in the San Francisco Building Trades

Seidman, Joel, Labor Czars

Seidman, Joel, The Needle Trades

Soule, George, Sidney Hillman

Stolbert, Benjamin, Tailor’s Progress

Strong, Earl D., Amalgamated Clothing Workers

Wechsler, J. A., Labor Baron, Portrait of John L. Lewis

Management Organization in Industrial Relations

Required Reading:

Roethlisberger, F. S., Management and Morale, pp. 88-134

Twentieth Century Fund, Trends in Collective Bargaining, pp. 22-33

Hill, L. H. and Hook, C. R., Jr., Management at the Bargaining Table, pp. 56-138

Pigors, Paul and Meyers, Charles A., Personnel Administration, (pages to be assigned)

Recommended Reading:

Baker, Helen, The Determination and Administration of Industrial Policies

Barnard, Chester I., The Functions of the Executive

Gardiner, Glenn, When Foremen and Stewards Bargain

Gordon, R. A., Business Leadership in the Large Corporation

National Research Council, Fatigue of Workers, Its Relation to Industrial Production

Riegel, John W., Management, Labor and Technological Change

Scott, Walter D., Clothier, Mathewson, Spriegel, Personnel Management, Principles, Practices, and Points of View

Yoder, Dale, Personnel Management and Industrial Relations

II. OPERATIONS AND RESULTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

The Bargaining Process: Mechanics

Required Reading:

Peterson, Florence, American Labor Unions, pp. 187-210

Selected Agreements

Settling Plant Grievances, Bulletin 60, Division of Labor Standards

Recommended Reading:

Block, Louis, Labor Agreements in Coal Mines, pp. 71-124.

Hamburger, L., “The Extension of Collective Agreements to Cover Entire Trades and Industries,” International Labour Review, August, 1939, pp. 166-94

Lieberman, Elias, The Collective Labor Agreement, pp. 3-34

National Foremen’s Institute, How To Handle Collective Bargaining Negotiations

National Labor Relations Board, Written Trade Agreements, Bulletin No. 4

Pipin, Marshall, “Enforcement of Rights under Collective Bargaining Agreements,” University of Chicago Law Review, June, 1939

Updegraff, C. M., and McCoy, W. P., Arbitration of Labor Disputes

The Results on the Social Structure of a Work Community

Required Reading:

Mayo, Elton, The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization, pp. 59-112

Selekman, Benjamin M., “When the Union Enters,” Harvard Business Review, Winter, 1945, pp. 129-43

Selekman, Benjamin M., Labor Relations and Human Relations, (pages to be assigned)

Golden, Clinton S., and Ruttenberg, H. J., The Dynamics of Industrial Democracy, pp. 190-291

Recommended Reading:

Mayo, Elton, Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization

Moore, W. E., Industrial Relations and the Social Order

Robinson, G. Canby, “The Patient as a Person, The Social Aspects of Illness,” in Modern Attitudes in Psychiatry, pp. 43-60

Roethlesberger, F. J. and Dickson, W. J., Management and the Worker

Warner, W. Lloyd and Low, J. O., The Social System of the Modern Factory The Strike: A Social Analysis

Whitehead, T. N., Leadership in a New Society

The Results on the Conditions of Employment

Required Reading:

Slichter, Sumner H., Union Policies and Industrial Management, pp. 1-8, 53-136, 164-200, 241-81, 282-310, 572-79

Kennedy, Van Dusen, Union Policy and Incentive Wage Methods, pp. 50-104

National Industrial Conference Board, Job Evaluation, Formal Plans for Determining Basic Pay Differentials, pp. 1-12, 21-24

Twentieth Century Fund, How Collective Bargaining Works, pp. 227-79, 450-507

Recommended Reading:

Barnett, G. C., Chapters on Machinery and Labor

Drake, Leonard A., Trends in the New York Printing Industry

Haber, William, Industrial Relations in the Building Industry

Hill, Samuel E., Teamsters and Transportation

Jensen, Vernon H., Lumber and Labor

Lahne, Herbert J., The Cotton Mill Worker

Lytle, Charles W., Wage Incentive Methods, pp. 67-135

Morton, Thomas L., Trade Union Policies in the Massachusetts Shoe Industry

Ober, Harry, Trade Union Policy and Technological Change, (W.P.A., National Research Project)

Palmer, Gladys, Union Tactics and Economic Change

Patterson, W. F. and Hodges, M. H., Educating for Industry, Policies and Procedures for a National Apprenticeship System

Randall, Roger, Labor Relations in the Pulp and Paper Industry of the Pacific Northwest

Roberts, Harold S., The Rubber Workers

Ross, Murray, Stars and Strikes, Unionization of Hollywood

Seidman, Joel, The Needle Trades

The Effects on Wages, Prices and Employment

Required Readings:

Boulding, Kenneth, Economic Analysis, pp. 485-511

Slichter, Sumner H., Basic Criteria Used in Wage Negotiation

Federal Reserve Board, Federal Reserve Bulletin, July 1947 “Consumer Incomes and Liquid Asset Holdings”

Slichter, Sumner H., “The Responsibility of Organized Labor for Employment,” American Economic Review, May 1945, pp. 193-208

Dunlop, J. T., Wage Determination Under Trade Unions, pp. 8-27, 45-73, 95-121 “American Wage Deterination: The Trend And Its Significance”

Clark, J. M., “The Relation of Wages to Progress” in The Conditions of Industrial Progress (Wharton School of Finance and Commerce), pp. 22-39

Recommended Reading:

1. Wage and Employment Relations

Bissell, R. M., “Price and Wage Policies and the Theory of Employment,” Econometrica, June 1940, pp. 199-239

Cannan, Edwin, “The Demand for Labor,” Economic Journal, 1932

Carlson, Sune, A Study on the Pure Theory of Production

Douglas, Paul H., The Theory of Wages, pp. 113-58

Douglas, Paul H., “Wage Theory and Wage Policy,” International Labour Review, March 1939

Fellner, William and Haley, B. F., Editors, Readings in the Theory of Distribution

Hansen, Alvin H., Economic Policy and Full Employment

Hicks, J. R., Theory of Wages, pp. 1-38, 58-110

Keynes, J. M., The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (especially Chapter 19)

Lederer, Emil, “Industrial Fluctuations and Wage Policy: Some Unsettled Points,” International Labour Review, January, 1939.

Lester, Richard A., “Shortcomings of Marginal Analysis for Wage Employment Problems,” American Economic Review, March 1946, pp. 63-82

Mendershausen, H., “On the Significance of Professor Douglas’ Production Function,” Econometrica, October 1939

Machlup, Fritz, “Marginal Analysis and Empirical Research,” American Economic Review, September 1946, pp. 519-54

Pigou, A. C., The Economics of Welfare, 4^th edition, pp. 451-61, 531-71, 647-55

Pigou, A. C., The Theory of Unemployment, pp. 1-108

Pigou, A. C., Lapses from Full Employment

Pool, A. G., Wage Policy in Relation to Industrial Fluctuations

Reynolds, Lloyd G., “Relations between Wage Rates, Costs, and Prices,” American Economic Review, Supplement, March 1942, pp. 275-89

Robertson, D. H., “Wage Grumbles,” in Economic Fragments

Robinson, Joan, Essays in the Theory of Employment, pp. 1-104

Stigler, George J., Production and Distribution Theories, The Formative Period

Walker, E. R., “Wage Policy and Business Cycles,” International Labour Review, December 1938

Wermel, Michael T., The Evolution of the Classical Wage Theory

1. Wage Movements and Productivity

Ahearn, Daniel J., The Wages of Farm and Factory Laborers, 1914-1944

Bell, Spurgeon, Productivity: Wages and National Income

Bowden, Witt, “Wages, Hours and Productivity of Industrial Labor, 1909 to 1939” Monthly Labor Review, September 1940, pp. 517-44

Douglas, Paul H., Real Wages in the United States, 1890-1926

Ducoff, Louis J., Wages of Agricultural Labor in the United States, Technical Bulletin 895, Department of Agriculture

Fabricant, Solomon, Labor Savings in American industry 1899-1939

Lederer, Emil, Technical Progress and Unemployment

Lester, Richard A. and Robie, Edward A., Wages Under National and Regional Collective Bargaining

1. Share in National Income

Dunlop, J. T., Wage Determination Under Trade Unions, pp. 141-91

Kalecki, Michael, Essays in the Theory of Economic Fluctuations

Kuznets, Simon, National Income and Its Composition, 1919-38, Vol. I, pp. 215-65

Pigou, A. C., Economics of Welfare, pp. 619-41

Survey of Current Business, June 1947 (Supplement)

1. Size Distribution of Income

Bowman, Mary Jean, “A Graphical Analysis of Personal Income Distribution in the United States,” American Economic Review, September 1945, pp. 607-28

Clark, Colin, The Conditions of Economic Progress, Chapter 12

Mendershausen, Horst, Changes in Income Distribution During the Great Depression

National Resources Committee, Consumer Incomes in the United States

Staehle, Hans, “Short Period Variations in the Distribution of Incomes,” Review of Economic Statistics, 1937

1. The Annual Wage

Latimer, Murray W., Guaranteed Wages, Report to the President by the Advisory Board, OWMR (See Appendix F for economic analysis by Hansen and Samuelson)

Snider, Joseph, Guarantee of Work and Wages

Leontief, Wassily, “The Pure Theory of the Guaranteed Annual Wage Contract,” Journal of Political Economy, February 1946.

The Problem of Wage and Price Policies at Full Employment

Recommended Reading:

Leontief, W., “Wages, Profit and Prices,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1946, pp. 26-39

Fellner, W. J., Monetary Policies and Full Employment

Lange, Oscar, Price Flexibility and Full Employment

Dunlop, John T., “Wage-Price Relations at High Level Employment,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, May, 1947, pp. 243-53

The Impact on the Social Structure and the Political “Balance of Power” in the Nation

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. (HUC 8522.2.1) Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1947-48 (2 of 2)”.

Image Source: Cigar box label from the collections of the Museum of the City of New York.

Columbia Curriculum Economists Fields

Columbia. Paul Douglas petitions to allow sociology courses for his second minor. 1916

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-09

The minutes of this meeting of the Columbia Faculty of Political Science’s Committee on Instruction caught my eye because of Paul Douglas‘ petition to substitute a pair of sociology courses offered by Professor Franklin Giddings for a couple of intellectual history courses that would satisfy the distribution requirements for the second minor.

It appears that Douglas thus managed to have his major and both minors all in Group III (i.e., political economy and finance; sociology and statistics; social economy).

_____________________________________

Minutes of Committee on Instruction, February 21, 1916

A meeting of the Committee on Instruction of the Faculty of Political Science was held in Professor Seligman’s office on Monday, February 21, 1916.

Present: Professors Seligman, Giddings, Dunning, Shotwell and Dean Woodbridge.

The Chairman presented the following petitions, which were approved and referred by the Committee to the Dean for further action:

Petition from Miss Dorothy Stimson to divide her second minor for the doctor’s degree between Public Law and Politics.

Petition from Mr. Paul H. Douglas to offer Sociology 257 and 258, under the heading History of Thought and Culture, as a second minor for the Ph.D.

A statement from Mrs. H. L. Hollingworth, submitting the courses which she is offering for the Ph. D. Degree in Sociology, as follows:

Sociology 251-252 (2 full courses) Taken in 1912-13.
Psychology 263 (1 full course)        Taken in 1912-13.
(Social Psychology)
Educational Sociology 107-8 (2 half courses) Taken in 1912-13.
Sociology 257 (1 full course)           Taken in 1913-14
Sociology E1 43-4 (24 courses)       Taken in 1915-16
One more full course in Sociology to be taken next semester.

The statement was accepted as satisfactory.

A petition of Mr. Ahmed Shukri to substitute Arabic in place of Latin was granted.

The Chairman read the letter from the Secretary of the Faculty concerning the routine to be followed in the reporting of changes of courses vt [sic] students. After consider[ation] of the matter, it was decided that only those cases which involve changes of subjects, with their regular combinations, should be reported to the Faculty, and that they should be reported by the Dean, not by the Committee, the Committee in every case referring the petition to the Dean.

The Committee then took up the changes in courses for the following year as attached:

[…]

The change in Economics is as follows:

PROFESSOR MITCHELL

Course on “Types” changed from one-term to two-term course.
Course on “Crises” withdrawn

[…]

Source: Columbia University Archives. Department of Economics Collection. Box 1, Folder “Committee on Instruction”.

_____________________________________

Catalogue Listings of Sociology Courses Petitioned by Paul Douglas

Sociology 257—The Evolution of Progressive Society. Professor Giddings.

Full or half course. F. at 2.10 and 3.10 515 K.

Factors of social evolution in Western Europe. Elements of progressive society; English civilization as example of evolution of progressive society; its ethnic elements; economic factors; folk thought, folk ways and mores; early family and tribal organization; development of a people with distinctive habits and characteristics.

(Identical with History 257.)
Given in 1915-16 and in alternate years thereafter.

Sociology 258—The Evolution of Progressive Society. Professor Giddings.

Full or half course. F. at 2.10 and 3.10 515 K.

Achievement of civil liberty in combination with social order; rise of industrial democracy; problems of social justice; individualism; collective responsibility for human progress.

(Identical with History 258.)
Given in 1915-16 and in alternate years thereafter.

Source: Columbia University. Bulletin of Information (July 3, 1915). History, Economics, and Public Law: Courses offered by the Faculty of Political Science, 1915-16, p. 36.

_____________________________________

From the 1915-16 Regulations for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy. — Each student who declares himself a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy shall designate one principal or major subject and two subordinate or minor subjects. Candidates are expected to devote about one-half of their time throughout their course of study to the major subject, and about one-quarter to each minor subject. Except by vote of the Executive Committee of the University Council, upon the recommendation of the Dean and the head of the department concerned, no candidate may choose his major and both minor subjects under one department. Major and minor subjects may not be changed except by permission of the Dean, on the approval of the head of the departments concerned. Both the professor in charge of the major subject and the Dean must pass upon the student’s qualifications for the course of study he desires to pursue, and approve his choice of subjects before registration can be effected. The subjects from which the candidate’s selection must be made are:

Under the Faculty of Political Science

Group I. — History and political philosophy: (1) Ancient and oriental history; (2) medieval history and church history; (3) modern European history from the opening of the 16th century; (4) American history; (5) history of thought and culture.

Group II. — Politics, public law and comparative jurisprudence: (1) Politics; (2) Constitutional Law and Administrative Law; (3) International Law; (4) Roman Law and Comparative Jurisprudence.

Group III. — Economics and social science: (1) Political economy and finance; (2) sociology and statistics; (3) social economy.

A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy whose major subject lies within the jurisdiction of this Faculty must select one minor subject outside of the group which includes his major subject, and one minor subject within the group which includes his major subject. He must take, in his major subject, courses occupying at least four hours weekly during each required year of residence (provided that this number of hours be offered in the subject), and must also attend a Seminar during the period of residence. In each minor subject he must take courses occupying at least two hours weekly during each required year of residence.

Source: Columbia University, Catalogue, 1915-16, pp. 214-5.

Image Source: Paul H. Douglas’ college yearbook entry. The Bowdoin Bugle (1913).

Tags Douglas, Giddings, Seligman

Columbia Economic History Economists Yale

Columbia Economics Ph.D. alumnus. John M. Montias, 1958

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-09-08
1 Comment on Columbia Economics Ph.D. alumnus. John M. Montias, 1958

The history of economics would be duller fare should we fail to add a portion of ancestor worship as seasoning. Since my motto is “Economists are not born but they are made” and that for well over a century economists have been made in graduate schools, I would be remiss in not using Economics in the Rear-View Mirror to erect shrines from time to time to those economists who trained me.

During the academic year 1973-74 while an undergraduate at Yale, I took a graduate course taught by John Michael Montias on comparative economic systems. Having been born in Paris, he volunteered out of interest in the topic to be the second reader of my senior essay about French mercantilism and the Physiocrats. I recall him as a thoughtful scholar and a kind man. He was one of four professors (the others were Raymond Powell, Abram Bergson and Evsey Domar) who in different courses valiantly tried to teach me the lessons of Richard H. Moorsteen’s article “On Measuring Productive Potential and Relative Efficiency” Quarterly Journal of Economics (1961) 75 (3): 451-467. The teaching efforts of Montias et al. did ignite in me a long professional interest in the economic theory of index numbers though I do not recall them exactly cracking the code in class for us. Montias’ own ambition was less on the bean-counting side of empirical comparative economics as on the theoretical side in pursuit of a formal systematization of a “macro”-institutional economics. We began his course by reading his essay co-authored with Tjalling Koopmans published in Comparison of Economic Systems: Theoretical and Methodological Approaches, Alexander Eckstein (ed.), Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971. I believe we can all agree that economic outcomes depend jointly on the economic environment, economic system and economic policies within the system. I also believe that the last sentence reads no better when expressed in mathematical notation.

John Michael Montias’ greatest hits in economics were to appear after I had moved on. He had a passion for Dutch and Flemish art that led to seminal contributions in the history of 17th century Dutch art markets. Tulip bubbles are cool, but I’d say Vermeer is hot.

P.S. Fun Fact: The U.S. Embassy official in Hungary who had to deal with Montias’ expulsion from Hungary in the early 1960’s, Edward Alexander, was in charge of the Press and Culture department of the U.S. Embassy in East Berlin during my seven month IREX stay in 1978. There I fell in love and became engaged to an economist at the Central Institute of Economics in the GDR Academy of Sciences. Until my East German fiancée (Kerstin Rüdiger) was allowed to leave East Germany at the end of 1979 (and perhaps afterwards too), Edward Alexander had to deal with any diplomatic fall-out from our case.

_____________________________

From the 1989 Survey of AEA Members

Montias, John M.

Fields: 050, 110
Birth Yr: 1928
Degrees: B.A., Columbia U., 1947; M.A., Columbia U., 1950; Ph.D., Columbia U., 1958
Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. of Econs. Yale U., 1964
Concurrent/Past Positions: Assoc. Prof., Yale U., 1963-64; Asst. Prof., Yale U., 1958-63.
Research: Economic systems

Source: American Economic Association. Biographical Listing of Members, American Economic Review, Vol. 79, No. 6, (Dec. 1989) p. 334.

_____________________________

New York Times obituary

John Montias, 76, Scholar of Economics and of Art, Is Dead
By KATHRYN SHATTUCKAUG. 1, 2005

John Michael Montias, an economist who became one of the foremost scholars on the painter Johannes Vermeer and a pioneer in the economics of art, died on Tuesday at a hospice in Branford, Conn. He was 76 and lived in New Haven.

The cause was complications from melanoma, said his son, John-Luke Montias.

Part of the Annales school of economists and historians, Mr. Montias was among those who, in the early and mid-20th century, promoted a new form of history by replacing the examination of major leaders and events with the microstudy of ordinary people and occurrences.

Through the scrupulous analysis of common documents ranging from notes and letters to receipts and legal papers, Mr. Montias peeled back the layers in the life of Vermeer, one of his favorite artists — and one of the world’s most enigmatic. His work opened the door for a new genre of art history in which artists were analyzed in the context of their societal and economic surroundings and not merely their works.

“I think he was important for all of us,” said Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, the John Langeloth Loeb professor emeritus at New York University’s Institute of Fine Arts. “When he started this in the 1960’s and 70’s, there was no one who approached the history of art from that point of view. His work was pioneering — accurate, extremely convincing, with many novel insights. What was not considered to be relevant to the work of art in the past, we all have subsequently used.”

Mr. Montias’s research was a primary source for Tracy Chevalier’s 2000 novel “Girl With a Pearl Earring,” about Vermeer’s relationship with the model for his iconic work, and for the 2003 film adaptation.

Mr. Montias began teaching at Yale University in the late 50’s, where he specialized in the economic systems of the Soviet bloc during the 1960’s and 70’s and served as a consultant to high-ranking government officials. His analysis of the economies of Eastern European countries at times drew suspicion, perhaps never more so than during his visits to Czechoslovakia and Hungary from 1963 to 1965; he was shadowed and eventually expelled from Hungary on suspicion of espionage. But if his work was economics, his passion was art, particularly that of the 16th- and 17th-century Netherlands.

“I came to Vermeer ‘sideways,”‘ he said in a 2003 interview for the Essential Vermeer Web site (www.essentialvermeer.20m.com), explaining the genesis of his second career. Having won a summer grant in 1975 to write a comparative study of Dutch art guilds, he traveled to Delft, where he discovered that no in-depth study of a guild existed.

“In the course of this research, I realized that, contrary to my expectations, previous scholarship on Vermeer’s life had not exhausted the subject,” he said.

And so began his quest to uncover the life of one of the world’s most mysterious artists, with Mr. Montias unearthing and poring over 454 documents related to Vermeer and his family that lay, long undisturbed, in the archives of no fewer than 17 Dutch and Belgian cities.

In 1989 he published “Vermeer and His Milieu: A Web of Social History” (Princeton University Press), in which he revealed secrets of Vermeer’s life: that Vermeer’s grandfather was a convicted counterfeiter; that his grandmother ran illegal lotteries; and that the artist himself fathered 13 children and died at the age of 43, destitute.

Reviewing the book in The New York Times, the art critic John Russell wrote that Mr. Montias had previously “proved that there is a great deal more to art history than shuffling slides in a library.”

“His new book does not crack the code of Vermeer’s personality, let alone the code of his inner experience,” the review continued. “But as detective work, and as a portrait of an era, it ranks high.”

In fact, Mr. Montias’s midlife obsession had adolescent roots. Born on Oct. 3, 1928, in Paris, he was sent in 1940, alone and by ship, by his Jewish parents to the safety of the United States — and an Episcopalian baptism — just as the Germans were preparing to invade France. He boarded at the Nichols School in Buffalo, where as a 14-year-old volunteer in the small library of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, he came across Wilhelm Bode’s gilt-edged folio volume of Rembrandt and was immediately captivated.

Mr. Montias’s curiosity resurfaced in 1954 when, as a Ph.D. candidate in the economics department at Columbia University, he considered writing his dissertation on the prices of Dutch paintings at auction. He failed to get financial support for his project, perhaps thought frivolous during the cold war.

Things changed when Mr. Montias met Mr. Begemann in the mid-1960’s, when they were both at Yale. A specialist in Dutch and Flemish art, Mr. Begemann gave Mr. Montias his first lessons in connoisseurship, and soon after he began to study the genre’s history methodically. His first project in the field — the 1975 summer grant — required Mr. Montias, already a gifted linguist, not only to learn modern Dutch but also to read 17th-century manuscript sources in old Gothic script.

“He decided to attack the archives in Delft, knowing that they had been scoured for information on Vermeer,” recalled Otto Naumann, a Manhattan art dealer who studied under Mr. Montias. “With the confidence that only a true genius can posses, he decided that he could do better, without first learning Dutch.”

It took Mr. Montias one week to find an unpublished document that mentioned Vermeer and but another to decipher it, Mr. Naumann said.

Mr. Montias published three more books about the 17th-century Dutch art market: “Artists, Dealers, Consumers: On the Social World of Art” (Hilversum: Verloren, 1994); “Public and Private Spaces: Works of Art in 17th-Century Dutch Houses” (Zwolle, 2000), with John Loughman; and “Art at Auction in 17th-Century Amsterdam” (Amsterdam University Press, 2003).

In addition to his son, of Manhattan, he is survived by his wife, Marie, of New Haven, and his mother, Giselle de la Maisoneuve, of Paris.

____________________________

Yale Bulletin & Calendar obituary

Yale Bulletin & Calendar. September 2, 2005. Vol. 34, Number 2.

John-Michael Montias, economist and expert on Vermeer

John-Michael Montias, one of the world’s foremost scholars on the life of 17th-century Dutch artist Johannes Vermeer and professor emeritus of economics at Yale, died July 26 of complications from melanoma. He was 76.

Montias, who joined the Yale faculty in the late 1950s, was a specialist in the economic systems of the Soviet bloc. He researched the economies of many Eastern European countries during the 1960s and 1970s. During the Cold War, he served as a consultant to some of the highest officials of the U.S. government. His publications from that period include “Central Planning in Poland” and “The Structure of Economic Systems,” both published by the Yale University Press.

Although his academic work was in the field of economics, Montias’ passion was art, specifically 16th- and 17th-century Dutch painting. While on a fellowship at the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Social Studies in 1978, he combined the two interests by writing a comparative study of Dutch art guilds during the 16th century, poring over 16th- and 17th-century archival records in the process of teaching himself gothic Dutch. The result was his 1982 book “Artists and Artisans in Delft, a Study of the 17th Century.”

During the course of his research, Montias was surprised to learn that the scholarship on one of his favorite artists, Vermeer, was far from exhausted. He began a quest to uncover the life of the artist, considered one of the most enigmatic and mysterious. In 1989 he published the critically acclaimed “Vermeer and His Milieu: A Web of Social History.” In this book, Montias traced the artist’s life through notary records, discovering that Vermeer’s grandfather was a convicted counterfeiter; that his grandmother ran illegal lotteries; and that the artist himself fathered 13 children and died at the age of 43, completely destitute. Today, it is estimated that there are only about 35 Vermeer paintings still in existence, and the most recent work sold at auction was purchased for $26 million in London last July.

Montias published three more books about the 17th-century Dutch art market: “Artists, Dealers and Consumers: The World of Social Art” (1994), “Public and Private Spaces: Works of Art in 17th-Century Dutch Houses” (2000) and “Art at Auction in 17th-Century Amsterdam” (2002).

Born Oct. 3, 1928 in Paris, France, Montias came to the United States when he was 12. At 16 he matriculated as an undergraduate at Columbia University. After serving in the Army during the Korean War, he returned to Columbia, earning both his M.A. and Ph.D. in economics. He was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1961.

Montias is survived by his wife, Marie, of New Haven; his mother, Giselle de la Maisoneuve, of Paris, France; and his son John-Luke, and his fiancé, Samantha, both of New York City.

The Yale economist was buried in Grove Street Cemetery.

Image Source: Montias as Guggenheim Fellow (1961) John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. Detail from “Montias at the launching party at Amsterdam University Press of his book Art at auction in 17th-century Amsterdam, 10 September 2002 (Photo: Gary Schwartz)“

Tags Bergson, Domar, Montias, Powell

From the Preface

APPENDIX II

I. Their present representation on Harvard staff.

II. Gross average age of men at time of taking doctorate.

III. Distribution of youngest groups by departments.

IV. Academic year-span.

V. Distribution by departments of men who dropped out temporarily, left before taking final examinations, or stayed on to the end.

VI. Analysis of numbers of men whose study was uninterrupted.

VII. Effect of teaching on age at graduation.

VIII. Teaching of normal men.

APPENDIX IV

Harold Glenn Moulton: Life and Career

Selected early (i.e. downloadable) works by Moulton

Minutes of the Faculty of Political Science Feb. 13, 1920

I. Requirements

II. Procedure

Stephen Butler Leacock University of Chicago Ph.D. in Political Economy, 1903.

Author’s Preface to Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912)

Academic and political life

Literary Life

Course Enrollment

HARVARD UNIVERSITY 1945-6 Economics 142a

Final Examination Questions

1945-46

HARVARD UNIVERSITY ECONOMICS 142A

Graduate Courses in 1971-72 Core Fields and Faculty

PRICE THEORY

THEORY OF INCOME, EMPLOYMENT, AND THE PRICE LEVEL

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

COURSE NO. 1, to be called 331 taught in Fall and Winter

COURSE NO. 2, to be called 330 taught in Fall and Spring

COURSE NO. 3, to be called 332 taught in Winter and Spring

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Course Enrollment for Economics 81a, Fall Term 1947

OUTLINE Economics 81a Fall, 1947

LABOR ORGANIZATION AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Economics 81 a Questions

Required and Recommended Reading

I. LABOR AND MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION

II. OPERATIONS AND RESULTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Minutes of Committee on Instruction, February 21, 1916

Catalogue Listings of Sociology Courses Petitioned by Paul Douglas

From the 1915-16 Regulations for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

From the 1989 Survey of AEA Members

John Montias, 76, Scholar of Economics and of Art, Is Dead By KATHRYN SHATTUCKAUG. 1, 2005

Yale Bulletin & Calendar. September 2, 2005. Vol. 34, Number 2.

John-Michael Montias, economist and expert on Vermeer

Minutes of the Faculty of Political Science
Feb. 13, 1920

Stephen Butler Leacock
University of Chicago Ph.D. in Political Economy, 1903.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1945-6
Economics 142a

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 142A

Graduate Courses in 1971-72
Core Fields and Faculty

COURSE NO. 1, to be called 331
taught in Fall and Winter

COURSE NO. 2, to be called 330
taught in Fall and Spring

COURSE NO. 3, to be called 332
taught in Winter and Spring

OUTLINE
Economics 81a
Fall, 1947

Economics 81 a
Questions

John Montias, 76, Scholar of Economics and of Art, Is Dead
By KATHRYN SHATTUCKAUG. 1, 2005